Citizens for Covenant Compliance v. Anderson
California Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
ARABIAN, J.
The Andersons want to plant and harvest grapes, operate a winery, and keep llamas on their property in Woodside. Some neighbors object, and claim such activities are prohibited by covenants, conditions and restrictions (CC&R’s) that limit the Andersons’ property, and theirs, to residential use. The Andersons counter, thus far successfully, that the CC&R’s are not enforceable because they are not mentioned in any deed to their property. The dispute is now before us.
Its resolution requires us to penetrate a legal thicket entangled by the ancient doctrines of convenants that…
2Cases cited24 opinions
- Newman v. Emerson Radio Corp.California Supreme Court · 1989
- Werner v. GrahamCalifornia Supreme Court · 1919
- Peterson v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1982
- Nahrstedt v. Lakeside Village Condominium Assn.California Supreme Court · 1994
- Wing v. Forest Lawn Cemetery Assn.California Supreme Court · 1940
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by63 opinions
- Pinnacle Museum Tower Ass'n v. Pinnacle Market Development (US), LLCCalifornia Supreme Court · 2012
- Murillo v. Fleetwood Enterprises, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1998
- Lamden v. La Jolla Shores Clubdominium Homeowners Ass'nCalifornia Supreme Court · 1999
- Garcia v. HejmadiCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1997
- Stewart Lamle v. Mattel, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2005
58 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.